Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

E3 Coming Back Big In 2009

Soulskill posted about 6 years ago | from the back-from-the-dead-some-would-say dept.

Businesses 35

Newsweek reports that next year's E3 will be expanding its attendance cap to 40,000 in an attempt to return as the premiere large-scale gaming expo. E3 scaled back its operations over the last few years, leading some to speculate that it was outliving its usefulness. This year, according to E3's organizers, we can "expect a boat load of press conferences on Monday during the day and on Tuesday morning." Newsweek also claims E3 will be opening to the public for the first time, allowing fans inside for the last two days of the event. However, G4's coverage says that while the vetting process for attendees will be eased, the event still won't be open to the public. An official announcement will be made tomorrow by the Entertainment Software Association.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So they say. (2, Insightful)

AltGrendel (175092) | about 6 years ago | (#25450721)

Just let them try to top PAX.

Re:So they say. (1)

Scott Kevill (1080991) | about 6 years ago | (#25451425)

Just let them try to top PAX.

They won't be trying to. PAX is for gamers.

E3 is (and always was) for the game industry, or at least very loose definitions of it anyway.

We won't know until the official announcement, but I'd lean more toward G4's version.

Re:So they say. (5, Interesting)

rsmith-mac (639075) | about 6 years ago | (#25452019)

I don't know anyone who went to the old E3 and could say it was about the industry. You had Gamestop stockboys from a 5 state radius there trying out games for their own personal amusement, while companies set up booths with automobile-sized speakers and threw a party because that's what the aforementioned stockboys expected. And if you really were in the industry, sure, whatever you say, you still wait in line.

The ultimate example of this I believe to be the line for the Wii in 2006 immediately after it was announced. It was hours and hours and hours long, a quite unprecedented line even by E3 standards. And it was filled with gawkers: the stockboys, their girlfriends, their best friend, and other people who had no business at an industry event. Lord help you if you had a legitimate reason to be there, you'd still need to send someone to stand in line all day just to get a shot at using the Wii to cover it for your publication, decide if you want to allocate shelf space for it, etc.

The new E3, on the other hand, was definitely an industry event. In fact I'd call 2008 a very good year; everything was well organized, getting to meetings was easy, and getting face time with a game and a developer was a piece of cake. Everyone was there to do business, there were no gawkers and vendors weren't forced to throw the equivalent of spring-break indoors.

I don't know why the E3 organizers would want to go back to the horrible old format, I guess it's better for them if it's a public show like PAX rather than an industry event? In any case, make no mistake, going back to the old format means it's a gamer show, and by extension it's gunning for PAX.

I should add that PAX is a cool show too, but like the old E3 it is not a good place to do business, and with the increasing crowds it only gets worse

Re:So they say. (1)

PhilJC (928205) | about 6 years ago | (#25452155)

Having never been to E3 itself this may be completely wrong but I would guess that all the industry crowd/journalists get allocated a wad of free tickets to use for non-public days so it would make sense that by letting in the "stockboys" for a couple of days, for a fee, would definitely help offset some of the cost of hosting the overall event.

Just the way I'd do it anyway.

Re:So they say. (1)

Scott Kevill (1080991) | about 6 years ago | (#25452537)

Yes, as I implied with, "or at least very loose definitions of it."

Their stated intentions have always been of a trade show for the industry, even if it didn't really end up that way, as you have pointed out.

They definitely needed to tighten the policy, but I think the invite-only solution was too extreme in that direction and made the show a lot less useful than it could have been.

Re:So they say. (2, Insightful)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 6 years ago | (#25452653)

I think it's clear why the old format is returning, first, the press doesn't care about the conduct of business at E3. They want exclusive access to unreleased material, lots of flash and excitement, and with E3 not giving them any, they all went to PAX instead.

Secondly, the ESA's handoff to IDG to do E for All (AKA E4Empty) was an epic, epic fail. When you go from year one to year two and your attendance shrinks , you know you have a serious problem. (Compare to PAX, where year one to year two doubled attendance.) IDG completely dropped the ball, didn't learn anything from other events, and they were hostile and disingenuous to other events (to the point of virtually starting a hilarious war with PAX).

I expect E for All to be canceled for 2009. E3 wanted E4A to be the b2c face of the ESA, and since it didn't work, and the ESA has had so many other internal problems and failures and could be considered to be fighting for its life, I think the ESA looks at a reborn "old school" E3 as its last, best chance for relevance and consequently they'll throw everything they can at it. They want to take back the primacy of mediating the entire industry's message to consumers (which was previously always E3 by default because of no other comparable venue, even though it wasn't supposed to be a b2c event), but I think at this point now that PAX has proved itself to be the best b2c expo model in the gaming industry in the Western Hemisphere with attendance to match, that game is over. Moreover I think the ESA will fail to fully assess the realities of the new market environment, overreach itself, and collapse.

Re:So they say. (1)

ImpShial (1045486) | about 6 years ago | (#25458467)

ESA's handoff to IDG to do E for All (AKA E4Empty)

...... I expect E for All to be canceled for 2009. E3 wanted E4A to be the b2c face of the ESA, and since it didn't work, and the ESA....

My god, That's the most acronyms I've ever seen in a post!

Re:So they say. (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 6 years ago | (#25459593)

You must be new here... (And yes I know my UID is high, but was lurking since 98.)

Re:So they say. (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | about 6 years ago | (#25462683)

And most of them are TLAs [wikipedia.org]

Re:So they say. (1)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | about 6 years ago | (#25455259)

I think why E3 is changing back is because, although the new format was better for doing business, E3 was rapidly becomming an unimportant event for publishers because it was losing the attention of gamers. For years E3 has been more about building hype than it was about getting stock into retail outlets, and (with the growing popularity of blogs) the average stock-boy was starting to have a greater influence on pre-launch excitment for a game then gaming magazines were.

Re:So they say. (2, Insightful)

philspear (1142299) | about 6 years ago | (#25455533)

And it was filled with gawkers: the stockboys, their girlfriends, their best friend, and other people who had no business at an industry event. Lord help you if you had a legitimate reason to be there, you'd still need to send someone to stand in line all day just to get a shot at using the Wii to cover it for your publication, decide if you want to allocate shelf space for it, etc.

Aw, sounds like someone is mad he'll have to wait in line again! (Kidding, kidding, I tease).

Serious question though: you're saying that at the old E3, the press was treated the same as the retailers? "In the industry" doesn't seem like a real reason to get priority for trying new games, unless you're just talking about press. If I make games though, there's no reason I should get to cut in line to try my competitor's products, at least none that's obvious to me immediately. Those gamestop stockboys you talk about dismissively, I would assume they generate a lot of buzz where it counts about upcoming games, I could see more reason to give them a sneak peak over other game developers.

Press, obviously, would seem like the top priority, and I'm a little suprised that it sounds like press had to wait in line, but if you're complaining because you work for, say, Blizzard and didn't get to try the wii out first, well, what makes you better than the "gawkers?"

Re:So they say. (2, Insightful)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 6 years ago | (#25455721)

Mod parent up. Game company execs and devs are there to have meetings. The most likely result of playing competitors' games is either copying features they feel are innovative and/or starting 'counter-buzz' about how underwhelming and incomplete their competitors' E3 builds are.

If anything the stock jockeys are more valuable than the professional media, because they'll go home and talk about the reality of the game, rather than suck up to their industry sponsors like most gaming media outlets or pan their competitors like a designer or dev might.

Re:So they say. (1)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | about 6 years ago | (#25456097)

If you want a truck, don't buy a prius and then complain that it's not a truck.

If you want to start an Electronic Entertainment Conference, go right on ahead. As long as it's an Electronic Entertainment Expo, however, you should expect it to be more like a business fair and less like a corporate meeting.

You're dealing in an industry that thrives on impulse buys, heightened reflexes, and short attention spans. The big names in the fields are rarely MBAs, statesmen, or Nobel physicists; rather dropouts, social outcasts, and huge nerds. An expo isn't always about doing business, it's just as much or more about generating business -- half networking and half marketing. In the case of the target demographic, which also happens to make up a large part of the industry, the expo is set up to get them to buy or save up to buy what's next (and convince investors that's just what will happen). If you only want the networking, there are better, cheaper forums for that -- like conferences.

Yes, this is the simplified version, I'm not going to take the time to discuss every bump in the warped glass -- so don't bother pointing out the one, single exception where you know the only guy that didn't go to E3 to either gawk or be gawked at.

I don't know why [they] would want to go back (1)

nick_davison (217681) | about 6 years ago | (#25464477)

I don't know why the E3 organizers would want to go back to the horrible old format

Simple: They want to make money.
Or: They want to generate press for the industry's benefit.
Or: They want to generate public awareness for the industry's benefit.

Everyone bitched about how "wrong" the old event way. And yet a ton of press were there, generating a ton of press for all of the studios/etc. Studios that, for all their bitching, turned up, rented space, etc. for it.

Then they went ultra exclusive. And the press got bored because it wasn't a spectacle. And the companies realized they may as well do their own private gig, across town, and totally squeeze out the competition. And now no one paid for it and it kept dying a slow death.

A very good lesson is to ignore everyone talking about how things "should be" but instead look at what the evidence really supports. The "bad old days" that everyone "hated" kept getting more and more successful when judged by the simple metric of "did more and more vendors see it as worth being there?" The "improved" recent events failed by that simple metric.

If E3's goal is to function as a profitable event, the old way was better.
If E3's goal was to generate press attention, the old way was better.
If E3's goal was to generate public excitement with the industry, the old way was better.

If E3's goal was to be elitist but lonely to the point of insignificance, the new way rocks.

I'd say the other three are three great reasons to go back, holier-than-thou protesting about how bad it was aside.

(Speaking as a non-Gamestop stockroom industry [mobygames.com] person [imdb.com] . *grins*)

All Your Booth Babes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25462541)

Are Belong To PAX

They are dead (3, Informative)

rgo (986711) | about 6 years ago | (#25450723)

PAX has replaced E3 for a lots of people (including journalists)

Moron (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25459081)

As a game developer who has been to every E3 since the very first show it sickens me to see idiots like you running their mouths off because they see all the other idiotic fanboys doing the same.

Knock yourself out at that joke of an event PAX dipshit. E3 will continue to be all that matters for North America.

E3 2009 - A horse of a different color (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25450765)

My lovely horse, running through the field
Where are you going, with your fetlocks blowing in the wind?

I want to shower you with sugar lumps, and ride you over fences
Polish your hooves every single day, and bring you to the horse dentist

My lovely horse, you're a pony no more
Running around with a man on your back, like a train in the night...

Re:E3 2009 - A horse of a different color (3, Funny)

cosmocain (1060326) | about 6 years ago | (#25450827)

Sticking with the horse analogies [bpic.co.uk] :

The tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from one generation to the next, says that when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
But in modern business (and education and government), because heavy investment factors are taken into consideration, other strategies are often tried with dead horses, including the following:

1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Changing riders.
3. Threatening the horse with termination.

[...]

I just don't see where cars might fit in.

Re:E3 2009 - A horse of a different color (1)

crossmr (957846) | about 6 years ago | (#25455197)

The tribal wisdom of the South Barrington trailer part, pass on from one generation to the next, says that when you discover your el camino is stuck in mud up to your arse, the best strategy is to get out and wait for it to dry.
But in modern business (and education and government), because heavy investment factors are taken into consideration, other strategies are often tried with stuck cars, including the following:

1. Flooring it until you're out of gas.
2. Doubling the weight of the vehicle by getting your 3 closest friends to sit on it.
3. Planting some flowers in the back, sending out a press release about the cars impending "growth" and putting an "as-is" for sale sign on it.

yawn (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25450939)

Yes, sweet, let's go to the Staples Center, walk around in the halls where it's got the approximate temperature and humidity (due to nerd-sweat) of the jungle; wait 3 hours to see a five minute demo; almost touch a controller connected to something that could be cool before stopping at the last second when you see it's covered in... red bean paste(??); watch all the dorks taking pictures (with L-glass used mainly to do macro shots of their latest Gundam build) of girls who are just doing this booth thing until their modeling ship comes in....

NO THANKS.

The only thing worthwhile at E3 was Kentia Hall, and that was only because it was like walking around an insane asylum looking for the craziest of the crazies -- in the end you still felt sorry for them because, in fact, they're in Kentia Hall, where you might as well have your booth's signage read "Despite any indication to the contrary, we are absolutely not meant to be taken seriously -- please check out the original Asteroids cabinet in the middle of the Kentia exhibition area (but Gorf is still broken, as it's been the last three years)."

If you thought E3 was great, worth saving, or worth even going to -- you never went.

(But if you really must go, here's the pro-tip assuming the same location: Parking is $40 downtown. Drive to somewhere in Hollywood. Park for the whole day for $10. Get a Metro day pass. Ride the red line; transfer to blue, take it one stop, go in to the exhibition hall. You're welcome, I just saved you $30 - the cost of a small Pepsi.

Re:yawn (1)

jafuser (112236) | about 6 years ago | (#25461027)

They must have really jacked up the price in the past two years. In 2006, parking was $15-$20 within the radius of a 5 minute walk to the convention center. Our group even arrived late in the morning on most days and still had parking available.

And bombs bigger than ever. (1)

Cur8or (1220818) | about 6 years ago | (#25450989)

I dont think we'll see a 2010 E3. Fool me once.....

My arse (2, Informative)

MoFoQ (584566) | about 6 years ago | (#25451075)

Maybe these guys are smoking the same stuff that the guys at Fanny Mae, Freddy Mac, AIG, and WAMU have been smoking.

In this economy and the fact that tech giants have recently announced major lay-offs and down-sizing and what not (plus Circuit City is in the brink of bankruptcy according to the evening news), what company has the the money to spend on an expo that has diminishing returns and in the eyes of many if not all techies, a dead show? They are more likely to spend what little and precious funds they have on PAX and other more "successful" shows.

Re:My arse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25451697)

Much like Freddy Mae and company, E3 is assuming the real problem has to do with advertising.

If only they can advertise those subprimes just a bit more, it'll turn around, I'm sure of it...

I smell game industry bailout.

Re:My arse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25459219)

You are very pessimistic. Try looking at it from this perspective. E3 was( hopefully still is) the biggest baddest showing for what the Gaming industry had to offer. as the industry downsized, so did the E3. Sadly, it dropped down to a point where it was bleek. But, if you flip that and look a the way the industry is flipping around before our eyes you'd see that with the emergance of indie games( thanks PAX)and this falls line up of new original games( thank you left 4 dead, spore, Little big planet, and all those lovely DS games) the industry has hope and room to grow. I say it like this...the gaming industry will not die. The nerds of the world will not let it die, but it will get sick from time to time and if you look at E3 as a face of the gaming industry, you'd see that it got sick but now it is on it's way to becoming a healthy strong boy all over again!

As far as Circuit City goes...well...they suck. No real great prices, no benefit in going there to shop...meager associates and the store all look like crap. so...meh...newegg for computers and bestbuy for tv's....on gamestop for game thanks to there new little " buy here and get a freebie" campaign

You don't get it!!!! (4, Funny)

master_p (608214) | about 6 years ago | (#25451309)

E3 comes back for one game only!!!!

That's right, you heard it here folks: DNF would be ready and shown in the next E3!!!

Re:You don't get it!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25452687)

Except that 3DRealms has stated the past few years that E3 is irrelevant and haven't bothered to attend.

Re:You don't get it!!!! (2, Interesting)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | about 6 years ago | (#25453643)

It's rather appropriate that DNF in racing stands for "Did Not Finish". Seems rather apt for Duke.

Does E3 even matter anymore? (1)

lbbros (900904) | about 6 years ago | (#25451715)

A honest question. Given how void of breaking news the last E3 was , is there a point in making it anymore? The same applies to other shows throughout the world, including the latest TGS. All I saw was mostly marketing and hype, hype and marketing. If games shows are headed this way, it would be better not to hold them at all.

Sure they are. (1)

Huntr (951770) | about 6 years ago | (#25452077)

IMO, there isn't really room for multiple major gaming and electronic expos like E3, PAX, etc. Considering the economy and the inherently fickle nature of the gaming & gadget market, people and companies only really have time/money/energy for 1 of these mega shows per year in this area of interest. While E3 was king for a long time, the people there screwed up and PAX is just too good to let them back in. The ship sailed on E3 and it ain't comin back.

*YAWN* (1)

HiVizDiver (640486) | about 6 years ago | (#25454459)

/sits up
/stretches
/blinks eyes
/looks around


Sorry, you were saying something?

It's back. (1)

thefritob (234484) | about 6 years ago | (#25454669)

But it's not E3 without The G.O.D. Parking lot and mexican hot dog vendors. Both of which won't be there in 2009. It's like going to Disneyland when everything is down for maintenence.

No midgets, strippers, boxing nuns, booth babes, press lunches, drinkin with dev's. The only thing this has in common with E3's of past is that it's in the same building and that Kentia hall will still probably be the ass end of the expo.

Hardly a good gesture. (1)

sethstorm (512897) | about 6 years ago | (#25458957)

Newsweek also claims E3 will be opening to the public for the first time, allowing fans inside for the last two days of the event

Sounds like that's about when most of it's packed up and leaving.

PAX for teh win, Blizzcon for the grin (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 6 years ago | (#25461537)

E3 is so last century.

Seriously, they pulled a PS3.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?